This page explains how Crystalance decides what to publish, how we check it, and where we draw our lines. It exists because we ask you to trust what you read here, and trust should be earned in the open rather than assumed. If our About page explains what Crystalance is, this page explains how it is held to a standard.
We are an editorial publication that covers minerals through two lenses at once, the geological and the traditional, and takes both seriously. That dual approach only works if the reader can rely on us to keep the two straight: to be accurate about what is known, honest about what is believed, and clear about which is which. Everything below is in service of that.
How We Check Facts
Nothing factual is published on assumption. Every claim that carries weight, a hardness figure, a chemical composition, a locality, a price range, a historical detail, is flagged during drafting and checked before the article goes live. A claim we cannot verify against a reliable source does not get published as fact. It is either removed, rewritten as the belief or tradition it actually is, or held back until we can confirm it.
We are deliberately conservative with numbers. The crystal trade is full of confident specifics, carat weights, percentages, dates, that turn out to be repeated guesses. Where a figure is uncertain or disputed, we give a range rather than a false precision, and we lean to the cautious end rather than the impressive one. If a striking statistic cannot be traced to a credible source, we would rather leave it out than pass it along because it sounds good.
When we get something wrong, we fix it. Corrections and substantive updates are made to the article itself and noted, so the record reflects what we now know rather than quietly papering over what we used to say.
What We Cite, and Why
Where our claims rest on evidence, we link to the evidence, and we prefer primary and authoritative sources over other crystal sites. In practice that means:
- Mineralogical databases such as Mindat for composition, crystal system, hardness, and locality data.
- Government and scientific bodies such as the US Geological Survey for production, supply, and deposit information.
- Gemmological research such as the Gemological Institute of America’s published work for treatment identification, imitation patterns, and gem-trade practice.
- Museum collections, peer-reviewed papers, and established reference works for history, culture, and mineralogy.
We link out to these directly so you can check us. A claim worth making is a claim worth sourcing, and a source worth citing is one you can open and read for yourself. We do not treat “everyone says so” as evidence, because in this field everyone often says so because everyone copied the same original guess.
Health and Medical Claims
This is the line we hold most firmly, so we state it plainly. We do not claim that any crystal cures, treats, prevents, or manages any illness, physical or mental. We do not present “energy”, “frequency”, or “vibration” as measurable medical fact. When crystal healing has been tested directly, it has not outperformed a placebo, and we will not tell you otherwise.
We still write about the traditional and personal side of crystals, because meaning, ritual, focus, and beauty are real and worth taking seriously. But we frame those honestly, as tradition, belief, and personal practice, never as clinical outcome. A crystal is not a substitute for a doctor, a therapist, or medication, and nothing we publish should ever be read as a reason to delay care. We set this out in full in what we say about crystal healing.
The Language We Use
Because the difference between honest and misleading crystal writing lives in specific words, we are careful with ours. We will write that a stone is traditionally associated with something, or reputed to aid it, or that people use it for a purpose. Those framings are true and keep belief clearly labelled as belief. We will not write that a stone cures, treats, or heals, because those are claims about the body we cannot support.
We also avoid the recycled filler that fills most crystal pages, the interchangeable descriptions and inflated adjectives that say nothing. If a sentence does not carry real information, geological, historical, practical, or honestly experiential, it does not belong in the article.
Sourcing, Treatment, and Buying Honesty
When we cover buying, we hold sellers to the standard we hold ourselves to, and we tell you what to expect from an honest one.
On provenance, we treat a seller’s ability to name where a stone came from as a basic test of legitimacy. Country of origin is the floor, not the ceiling, and the absence of any origin information is itself information. On treatment, we believe a stone should be sold as what it is: a dyed, heated, or irradiated stone is often perfectly good and worth owning, but it should be disclosed and priced as treated, not passed off as a scarcer natural version. We explain both standards at length in ethical crystal sourcing and what “natural” actually means.
We also decline to promise certainty the trade cannot deliver. Where a stone’s full history is genuinely unknown, we say so, rather than reaching for a reassuring label we cannot stand behind.
Independence
Our recommendations reflect editorial judgment, not payment. When we pick a stone, an approach, or a vendor, it is because we would stand behind it, and when we name a red flag it is because we mean it. Where any commercial relationship exists behind a link or a recommendation, we disclose it clearly, so you can weigh it for yourself. We would rather lose a sale than earn one by recommending something we do not believe in.
Who Signs What
Crystalance is written by two editors, publishing under the pen names Daniel Ashford and Naomi Reeve. We use pen names for privacy, and we say so rather than let you assume otherwise.
Articles carry the name of the person who wrote them, because an article makes choices and someone should be accountable for them. Mineral Library entries are unsigned, because reference material is maintained rather than authored and no single name belongs on a page that is continually re-checked and extended. Work that is genuinely joint publishes under Crystalance Editorial Team, which is a description rather than a hedge.
The pen names carry no credentials of their own. No gemmological training, no professional qualification, no practitioner certification. Two collectors and readers approaching the same subject from different sides, and the About page sets out what that means. Publishing this way raises the bar rather than lowering it: with no expertise to trade on, the work has to be right.
Corrections and Questions
If you spot an error, have a better source, or want to question something we published, tell us. We take corrections seriously and would rather be corrected than be wrong. Reach us at [email protected].
These standards are how we intend the site to be judged. If we ever fall short of them, that is a failure to hold ourselves to our own line, not a change in the line. For the minerals themselves, plainly and accurately described, start with the Crystalance Mineral Library.
